CIT v. Industrial Solvents

119 ITR 608High Court1979#13317 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Industrial Solvents

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. KSK WIND POWER SANKONAHATTI ATHNI PRIVATE LIMIED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. KSK Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. PAN: AAECK 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. KSK Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. PAN: AAECK 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri S…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. KSK WIND ENERGY HALAGALI BENCHI PRIVATE LIMIED , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 33/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. KSK Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. PAN: AAECK 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. KSK Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. PAN: AAECK 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri S…

ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI vs. G SHOES EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6209/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5736/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) G. Shoes Exports Asst. Cit-25(1)/Cit City 25 बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, 1, Hitex Industrial Estate, S. V. Road, Dahisar (E), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Mumbai-400 068 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfg 5376 P (Assessee) : (Revenue) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6209/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-25(1), G. Shoes Exports Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 068 Vs. (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Radheshyam Jain : Shri Airiju Jaikaran Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.06.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 16.7.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 20.3.2013. 2

For Appellant: Shri Radheshyam Jain
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)

…The question was finally answered by it in the negative in-as- much as the manufacture of absorbent cotton wool, for which the unit was being set up, could not take place or be produced. Similarly, in CIT vs. Industrial Solvents and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. [1979] 119 ITR 608 (Bom), the business of the assessee-company was held to be set up only on the receipt of the power connection and not earlier on the purchase of raw material or even the installation of the machinery subsequently. A business is thus set up or established only when it is ready to be commenced, all antecedent processes being preparatory in nature.…

WONDERVALUE REALTY DEVELOPERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 5(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6059/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6059/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Wondervalue Realty Developers P. Ltd. Ito, Ward 5(3)(4), बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, 5Th Floor, 505, Ceejay House, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 New Marine Lines, Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacw 8249 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Mandar Vaidya ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Airiju Jaikaran

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran
Section 143(3)Section 56

…iture incurred before that date would not be a permissible deduction in the assessment for the assessment year 1966-67.’ Noting precedents, it was observed by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Industrial Solvents and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. [1979] 119 ITR 608 (Bom) that mere installation of the machinery is not sufficient and, further, the fact that the product manufactured was not up to standard was not relevant, i.e., for determining if the business had been established or not. This was again emphasized in CIT vs. L & T Mcneil Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 0662 (Bom), as under: (pg. 663) ‘When a business is…

CIT v. Industrial Solvents (119 ITR 608) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax